4.2 Article

The 'adaptive zone' - A concept for assessing discomfort glare throughout daylit spaces

Journal

LIGHTING RESEARCH & TECHNOLOGY
Volume 44, Issue 2, Pages 149-170

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/1477153511420097

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation in the Office of Emerging Frontiers in Research and Innovation [EFRI-1038264]
  2. Directorate For Engineering
  3. Emerging Frontiers & Multidisciplinary Activities [1038264, 1452045] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Discomfort glare is an underutilized parameter in contemporary architectural design due to uncertainties about the meaning of existing metrics, how they should be applied and what the benefits of such analysis are. Glare is position and view direction-dependent within a space, rendering it difficult to assess compared to conventional illuminance-based metrics. This paper compares simulation results for five glare metrics under 144 clear sky conditions in three spaces in order to investigate the ability of these metrics to predict the occurrence of discomfort glare and to hence support the design of comfortable spaces. The metrics analyzed are Daylight Glare Index, CIE Glare Index, Visual Comfort Probability, Unified Glare Rating and Daylight Glare Probability. It is found that Daylight Glare Probability yields the most plausible results. In an attempt to deal with multiple positions and view directions simultaneously, the concept of an 'adaptive zone' is introduced within which building occupants may freely adjust their position and view in order to minimise the effect of glare. The spatial and directional extents of the adaptive zone depend on furniture layout and the freedom of occupants' tasks. It is found that applying the adaptive zone concept to a sidelit office with manually operated venetian blinds reduces the predicted hours of intolerable discomfort glare from 735 to 18 occupied hours per year and increases the annual mean daylight availability from 40% to 72%.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available